treaty-making procedure
This week we focused on International Law, with a particular focus on the treaty-making procedure. We discussed the various types of international agreements, which include treaties, agreements, pacts, accords, covenant, and declarations. The highlight of this week’s discussion was the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969. The stages of the Vienna Convention include presentation, adoption, authentication, consent to binding effect, entry into force, and recognition.
In accordance with this week’s reading, I chose an article by Ethiopian journalist Dejen Yemane Messele, which discusses the comprehensive agreement between Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan. The article interested me because it examines the flaws in the treaty-making process and recommends how to rectify the flawed procedures. Similar to our discussion in class, the article maintains that the three countries must adhere to the international treaty-making procedure before adopting and ratifying a valid trilateral treaty. According to the article, the origin of the dispute among the three countries was Egypt’s opposition to the construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Egypt argued that the construction of the dam on the Blue Nile River would cause it to lose its water share of the Nile appropriated in 1959. However, Ethiopia rejected Egypt’s claim by relying on equitable utilization and No-significant-harm principles. The article maintains that the negotiations are flawed because they are being conducted at a rush pace.
The article is an interesting read because it highlights the politicization of international agreements. My first observation was the United States’ intervention in the matter. Why does the United States feel obligated to mediate every conflict or agreement in all parts of the world? In fact, the article questions the United States’ role in the GERD negotiations. The author asks whether the United States is the dafter of the agreement, a mediator, or an observer. The three countries in the Nile River dispute are members of the African Union. Therefore, I think it would be more appropriate if the African Union brokered the negotiations in conjunction with the United Nations. Thirdly, the article made me curious about the legal right to natural resources. How do countries resolve disputes that deal with the agreement on natural resources? The GERD dispute is a challenging issue because Ethiopia argues that construction of the dam will help with the country’s water security. In contrast, Egypt argues that construction of the dam will threaten its water security. Overall, I do not think it is fair for a country to claim unilateral and exclusive rights of a natural resource such as the Nile River. I believe that equity should also be placed at the center of the negotiation